Why Autism is Going to Be Here Much, Much Longer… Unless Major Change Happens…

This is the third article in a series focusing on the fact that Autism is a social issue that could have been, and should have been, solved a long time ago.

The first two articles you can access in the table to the right. This is an article I did NOT want to have to write for I simply do NOT like to have to openly question, or criticize, those that, for want of a better phrase, are on our side. Or, at least, APPEAR to be on our side.

But serious questions have been raised – and those accused have not answered those questions satisfactorily – if at all. Because of this situation there is a huge rift in the Autism community and it is my recommendation to the North American Health Freedom Movement that we keep a hands off approach, offering NO help, or assistance, to them, until the Autism community solves its internal dissent situation. Why? To assist, at this point, would only help to perpetuate a VERY bad internal situation.

For about three years now I’ve been immersed in Autism politics, writing about it, primarily focusing on opposition strategies and tactics using the Mark and David Geier case series, Brian Hooker PhD’s investigation of the CDC series, the assault on Thimerosal in vaccines at the United Nations program to remove mercury from the environment series, and the series on the Doctor’s Data versus Stephen Barrett federal court case. I painted a picture, for my readers, of the opposition for all to see.

But, in my examination of the big Autism picture, something was very clear. And, that was that despite a very well-organized defense of vaccines, by what I call the “Vaccine Construction”, which we all know are the primary cause of not only Autism, but all the rest of the problems described in the “one-in-six US children have a neurological disorder” statement, there was no REAL, organized, counter-attack by “our side” to combat the machinations of the vaccine construction. None.

At first, trusting in the basic goodness of mankind, I assumed that, perhaps, there was just a lack of strategic and tactical, organizational ability in the Autism community. I had heard stories alleging that certain Autism leader’s idea of effective action was to dress up pretty and go to a meeting of a government agency and sit there quietly. Kind of a situational naïveté.

But then two things happened almost simultaneously. And there was a significant relationship between the two. Enough to change my suspicions from “situational naïveté” to asking the question “Is this a Fifth Column operation?”

Below, I am going to let you read what I was presented with and let you, the reader, make your own decision about what is happening.

More, just while I was beginning to investigate the two things, and their relationship, a third thing happened, and, as a result, I got on an airplane and flew to Washington DC for a private meeting with a philanthropic organization, and some others, about the Autism leadership problems. In short, someone else, operating from an entirely different perspective – the funding of Autism activism, was raising similar questions to mine, demanding answers. They weren’t getting satisfactory answers either – so they pulled the funding, and sent me a copy of the stop-funding letter. And, the letter looked like something that I, Tim Bolen, would have written. It was scathing. I couldn’t have done better myself.

It was time to get on an airplane and go compare notes, so I did. More on this a little later.

The Things…

More Articles About CoMeD’s attempts to remove mercury from vaccines at UNEP…

“Vaccine Construction” Moaning, and Whimpering, Over UNEP Program to Ban Mercury in Medicine…

The Battle to Get Mercury Out Of Planet Earth’s Environment Continues…

– See more at: https://bolenreport.com/Mark%20Geier/unep%206.htm#sthash.ZT8JpfOV.dpuf

“Vaccine Construction” Moaning, and Whimpering, Over UNEP Program to Ban Mercury in Medicine… The Battle to Get Mercury Out Of Planet Earth’s Environment Continues… 1/17/13

(1) The First Thing: The “anti-mercury in vaccines” group Coalition for Mercury Free Drugs (CoMeD) had, through persistence, put the discussion of mercury in vaccines before the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) a UNEP2. Below is an excerpt from CoMeD’s Press Release:

Just to the right, in the table, are seven earlier articles on this subject. In short, from UNEP 2 through the middle of the last meeting UNEP 5, the removal of mercury in vaccines was very much on the table, with this international treaty making organization.

At UNEP 3, the drug lord’s wholly owned front group, the World Health Organization (WHO), coupled with the US FDA, shrieked at the delegates, demanding that they IMMEDIATELY remove the mercury in medicine ban from the Treaty language. But that didn’t happen.

At UNEP 4 there was an even bigger argument. Coming into UNEP 5 there was every indication that the UN team would eliminate mercury, by treaty, from vaccines, worldwide. But then two things happened. The first was laughable – the American Pediatrics Association (APA) had come out with a published article railing against the removal of mercury from vaccines. What a surprise – sarcasm intended.

But it was the second UNEP thing that was the real surprise. An Autism group called SafeMinds, who also attended the UNEP meetings, had come out apparently supporting the APA’s position opposing the ban on Thimerosal. More, it came out, SafeMind’s representative at the UNEP meetings, their Executive Director Eric Uram, had apparently been working against CoMeD, at UNEP, the whole time. SafeMinds issued their own Press Release just before UNEP 5. The critical language in their release was:

“As a result, SafeMinds continues calling for nations to support language in the treaty initiating a phasedown approach for eliminating all forms of mercury from use in pharmaceutical and personal care products, including vaccines.”

A phasedown? There is no such thing – nor did anyone, on either side of the argument, propose such a thing at UNEP. Nor will it ever happen. “Phasedown” is an industry term meaning “we’ll never do anything voluntarily. What kind of idiot would think we would?”

So, I, Tim Bolen, confronted SafeMinds with a few written questions about that position, addressed to theSafeMinds’ Board of Directors. Here they are below:

SafeMinds

I am preparing an article for my newsletter on the recent UNEP 5 mercury issue.

I am writing about what recently happened in Geneva over the last minute removal of the Thimerosal in Vaccines issue from the treaty language.

I have concerns about SafeMinds role in this disaster. I am told that SafeMinds, claiming to represent the autism world, made it very clear to the delegates that it DID NOT support a ban on Thimerosal in vaccines at any of the UNEP conferences.

The reports I am getting about SafeMinds’ participation at UNEP, in general, from others attending are not good, and raise serious questions.

“As a result, SafeMinds continues calling for nations to support language in the treaty initiating a phasedown approach for eliminating all forms of mercury from use in pharmaceutical and personal care products, including vaccines.”

As you know there is no such thing as a “phasedown.”

Can you tell me, please:

(a) On what date did your organization Board vote to adopt this “phasedown” policy? Who was in favor? Who opposed? Are their written minutes of this Board decision?

(b) I am told that your representative at the UNEP meetings, Eric Uram, never even once made a proposal even for a “phasedown” much less a ban on Thimerosal, at the UNEP meetings. Above, as an attachment, is his opening statement for UNEP 5. As you can see it says virtually nothing.

(c) Can you tell me what specific instructions were given to Eric Uram about his role at UNEP 5?

(d) I am told that Eric Uram, at all of the UNEP conferences, hung out with the Zero Mercury Working Group, which espoused the idea that this Treaty was about the environment, and that no health issues, like Thimerosal in vaccines, were allowed. Can you explain this?

The answer I got to my questions, from Sallie Bernard, their president(?), didn’t even address my questions, much less provide an answer. I know obfuscation when I see it, so I sent this below:

Sallie Bernard, et al:

I see that you have not had time, yet, to answer my question(s). I have a busy day today, so I’ll jump ahead to where I’m going with this.

I am investigating to see why Autism is still with us, when, clearly it could have been solved as a problem years ago. I have identified several concern areas, so far, all of which can be dealt with. One of the primary areas of concerns, to me, is why the Autism infrastructure fails every time – and I am looking hard at the factors.

SafeMinds is one of those factors – for, although it claims a leadership role, it has an abysmal success rate. Your organization reminds me of the Detroit Lions football team story where Michiganders are waiting for an even colder winter – when the temperature drops to 500 below zero, and Hell freezes over, and the Lions will win the Super Bowl.

You should be careful how you answer my questions, for, frankly, your future as an organization depends on your answers. You, and yours, are under a microscope – and you certainly deserve to be. If there is an explanation for your abysmal success rate NOW would be a good time to explain yourselves.

Should you, foolishly, NOT answer my questions, or attempt to obfuscate again, I will take that as an answer, and proceed accordingly.

Tim Bolen

As you can imagine – they didn’t answer my questions – not directly anyway. Which IS an answer.

And the story was about to get MUCH better…

More Articles About Brian Hooker PhD’s Relentless Investigation of the CDC

(2) The Second Thing: Jake Crosby, who has been writing for Age of Autism (AoA) for a long time, communicated to me that he had written an extremely controversial article called “SafeMinds Steals the Show – Literally” which had been REJECTED by AoA for publication. Jake sent it to me asking me if I would publish it.. But, instead of immediately publishing it on my website, and sending it out to my “Millions of Health Freedom Fighters – Newsletter” I put it in a hidden place and sent it out to a much smaller email list called “Autism Leadership Council” and asked for comments. Here is what I said in the message:

Jake Crosby, who we usually see writing for Age of Autism, has sent me an Opinion Article titled “SafeMinds Steals the Show – Literally” he wrote and has asked me to run it on the Bolen Report. It is a VERY STRONG criticism of SafeMinds actions surrounding the Autism Hearing in front of the Congressional Oversight and Government Reform Committee, chaired by Darrell Issa.

Jake’s article, I am told, was rejected by AoA for publication.

I am asking for comment – either public or private – none of which I would use without specific permission.

This is a SERIOUS ISSUE – one the Autism Leadership needs to discuss.

As you all know I have a very large readership that extends far beyond the Autism community.

Tim Bolenwww.bolenreport.com
Take the time, right now, to read Jake’s article. It’s fairly long, with lotsof detail, but it won’t take you long to get the gist of it, and sense the outrage, and the arrogance of what SafeMinds actually did.

The Autism community was talking about this everywhere – and NOT in a friendly manner to SafeMinds. The responses, both on the telephone and via email, to my inquiry about Jake’s article, were VERY supportive of what Jake had to say, and more, indicated that this sort of activity was common in the Autism community. A constant turf war by a specific group who wanted to appear as the leadership. A specific group with few or no victories in their Win Column.

Rather than write something all over again, just below you will find my response to the answers I got to the question “Should I run Jake’s article?” I posted them to the whole “Autism Leadership Council.”

The SafeMinds issue – up to date

I very much appreciate all of you responding, explaining the problem as you see it, and making suggestions on how to proceed.

As you can imagine the responses are varied, but lean, heavily, towards my running of Jake’s article.

I am told that SafeMinds, due to a number of reasons, just now, has lost the majority of its funding.

More I am told, on good authority, that Mark Blaxill has resigned from the SafeMinds Board.

And, last but not least, a new organization has been formed (Facing Autism), including funding, with several SafeMinds directors jumping ship, and staffing the new organization Board. Their purpose, I am told, is to deal directly with the Autism Squeaks (Speaks) propaganda.

It looks to me like the theory is to just let SafeMinds operation die gracefully. But, I’m not so sure that’s a good idea. So, I’d like to point out, once again, some ideas for discussion, and, introduce some other concerns about SafeMinds that have been brought to my attention.

To date:

(1) We all know that Jake Crosby wrote a very strong condemnation of SafeMinds’ activities regarding the Oversight and Governmental Affairs Autism hearings. Jake raised some very compelling issues and treated us all to an insider’s view of how decisions were made, and for what apparent reasons. Personally I applaud his ethics. It was a very difficult thing for him to do. And, certainly, this issue should have been, and needs to be, discussed, among the Autism leadership.

The trouble is that Jake got shut down, and when THAT happened, he brought it to me. I can’t criticize Dan Olmstead from AoA for not running Jake’s article. I can sympathize with Dan, trying to keep the Autism balls in the air, and keep AoA running.

(2) We all know, now, that SafeMinds openly opposed CoMeD’s efforts at UNEP 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 to include the removal of Thimerosal from vaccines worldwide – and DID NOT reveal their official position until moments before their Executive Director Eric Uram flew to Geneva for UNEP 5. We also know that until UNEP 5 the language for removal WAS IN the proposed Treaty.. Uram was working for who (WHO?)?

The World Health Organization (WHO) was in a panic, going so far as to enlist the pediatricians in their quest to get that language out of the Treaty. And Eric Uram was doing what at UNEP? The SafeMinds’ Board is refusing to answer my questions about this.

(3) Just a few days ago the skeptics came to SafeMinds’ defense, attacking Jake, me, AoA, Brian Hooker, Andy Wakefield, Mark Geier and just about everybody EXCEPT SafeMinds. Them (SafeMinds), they held up as the “appropriate opposition.” Orac (David Gorski and his 39 million dollar grant from Sanofi Aventis) was clearly so angry for SafeMinds you could practically see the spittle on his page. And, they brought in Brian Deer to do more of the same. Theskeptics were making it very clear who their friend and ally in this argument was.

(4) Now, here is a new one for you. It is an issue that came up from Mark Blaxill’s testimony at the Congressional Autism hearing – the money spent on Autism Gene research – rather than on finding the causes of Autism. So, I began to research what he was talking about.

It seems that the Combating Autism Act of 2006, Pub. Law No. 109-416 was enacted in 2006. It allocated 950 million US dollars to, supposedly, fix the Autism problem. The Act was renewed in 2011 authorizing another 693 million. That’s a total of one billion six hundred and forty three million (1,643,000,000) US dollars for Autism Research NONE OF WHICH WAS EVER ALLOCATED FOR THE PURPOSE OF FINDING THE CAUSE.

SafeMinds had a representative on the Inter Agency Coordinating Council (IACC), the group that decided how the money would be spent, for ALL SIX YEARS, who observed this negative activity, watching, and voting, on what to spend the money on. So, WHY WASN’T THAT HOT NEWS on the SafeMinds website? Why did I have to find out about this on my own? Why didn’t SafeMinds make this a major issue? 1.3 billion dollars spent on nothing of any use?

It is common knowledge in the scientific community that Gene Research is a bust – and that the whole Genome Project accomplished absolutely nothing. So, where was Safeminds? Why weren’t they screaming from the rooftops? They were there and had inside information. You call this leadership?

– See more at: https://bolenreport.com/Mark%20Geier/unep%206.htm#sthash.ZT8JpfOV.dpuf

“Vaccine Construction” Moaning, and Whimpering, Over UNEP Program to Ban Mercury in Medicine…

The Battle to Get Mercury Out Of Planet Earth’s Environment Continues…

– See more at: https://bolenreport.com/Mark%20Geier/unep%206.htm#sthash.ZT8JpfOV.dpuf

Is the entire Autism movement being run as a Ken and Barbie romance fantasy?

(3) The “Ken and Barbie” Thing:

Throughout the discussions with Autism people about what I call the “Autism leadership problem” one other situation kept coming up – the relationship between Mark Blaxill and Jennifer VanDerHorst-Larson. Both Blaxill and Larson have children with Autism – and both seem to be married to someone else – that someone else who takes care of the autistic children while Mark and Jennifer (Ken and Barbie) travel together, endlessly, running, and/or influencing, various organizations (SafeMinds, Facing Autism, the Canary Party, Age of Autism), all of which claim to speak for the Autism community.

I’m told that the night before the infamous Congressional Committee on Oversight and Government Reform committee hearing on November 29th, 2012, the one Jake Crosby talks about in his article, that Elyse Blaxill, Mark’s wife, confronted Mark and Jennifer about their “relationship.” Mark was quoted as saying “that was the worst night of my life.” I’m told that Capitol Police were notified to be on alert that Mark’s wife might try to disrupt the televised hearing.

While I was at the private meeting in Washington DC I received a message from Teri Arranga (AutismOne) that Mark and Jennifer were going to pull the Canary Party’s $9,000 sponsorship of AutismOne if I, Tim Bolen, remained on the AutismOne Speaker Schedule. They were reacting to me having made Jake’s article available to Autism leadership. They said I was “destructive.” Teri and Ed refused to remove me, so they lost that sponsorship.

I have since removed myself from those speaking engagements. I need to stay neutral.

The BIG Funding Removal…

No, I’m not talking about, here, the sponsorship for AutismOne by the Canary Party. I’m talking about what I wrote in paragraph eight above:

More, just while I was beginning to investigate the two things, and their relationship, a third thing happened, and, as a result, I got on an airplane and flew to Washington DC for a private meeting with a philanthropic organization, and some others, about the Autism leadership problems. In short, someone else, operating from an entirely different perspective – the funding of Autism activism, was raising similar questions, demanding answers. And, wasn’t getting satisfactory answers either – so they pulled the funding, and sent me a copy of the stop-funding letter. And, the letter looked like something that I, Tim Bolen, would have written. It was scathing. I couldn’t have done better myself.

Last year an organization called “Facing Autism” was formed. It’s purpose was to act as an umbrella group for the Autism community. I have a copy of the proposal sent to the philanthropic organization. It’s introduction said:

This is a proposed 501c3 umbrella organization designed to connect existing groups working on autism in order by developing a nation-wide network of walks and other fundraising events that will provide the needed profits for a variety of focused, shared services that those groups currently lack entirely or have resources inadequate for their needs.

 The Umbrella Group will be governed by a board of directors

o Participating Organizations will appoint board members along with initial funders and other key individuals.

 Invitation for collaboration will consists of the following obligation by member groups:

o $10,000 annual fee paid to the umbrella organization

o Board participation with travel and expenses once a year

o Understanding that all participating groups will maintain their own identity and have their own fundraising initiatives as well.

o Participating organizations must be aligned in their strategic view

o Organizations must sign onto a shared set of guiding principles and strategic goals to create a unified vision

The philanthropist agreed to fund the organization, under certain conditions, and would contribute $50,000 per quarter for one year, then $25,000 per quarter for at least two more years. The Board of Directors was made up of Jennifer Larson, Mark Blaxill, Katie Weisman, Lou Conte, Kim Mack Rosenberg, Mary Holland, Rebecca Estepp, Kevin Barry, John Gilmore, and Dan Olmstead.

The philanthropic organization funded the first quarter – then the problems started. On February 6th, 2013 the letter canceling the funding was sent. I heard, from the philanthropic organization, the reasons why they felt they needed to do that – and I wholeheartedly agreed. In short, in my opinion, “Facing Autism” simply didn’t do what they said they were going to do with the money.

Can you imagine the foolishness? There are many. many, Autism advocate organizations out there that, I believe, would have performed their agreed upon Mission knowing they had a guaranteed $200,000 the first year, and $100,000 per year after that. More, in my investigation of “Facing Autism,” I found that few if any, Autism groups knew about the formation of “Facing Autism.” Nor, apparently were they invited to provide input, or participate.

So, where then is the Autism Movement?

From over here in what’s called “The North American Health Freedom Movement” we see Autism (and the other neurological disorders) as only two issues: (1) What’s causing it, and how do we stop that? and (2) how do we repair the children and the families?

Both of these issues are solvable right this minute. We, as a society, know what causes them, and we know how to fix the children. So, what are we waiting for? Why hasn’t this problem been solved?

Good question. There are a lot of Autism small groups reaching out and solving, or at least mitigating, small problems. But, in the Autism community there is no General Plan, and no effort to put one together. More, the top leadership groups, for the most part, are exclusive, not inclusive.

So, in my opinion, without a change in Autism leadership, strategy and tactics, Autism is very much here to stay.

So, what should we, in the Health Freedom Movement do about this?

Frankly, I think we should take this project over, and run it ourselves. We are much better organized, treat each other with respect, and we like challenges. Most of all we know how to win.

And, yes, I have a list of people, and groups, in the Autism world we could work with.

Stay tuned.

Tim Bolen – Consumer Advocate

– See more at: https://bolenreport.com/Mark%20Geier/autism%20infighting3.htm#sthash.GtdhSwmB.dpuf